ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Cerebrospinal fluid-based clinical-radiomics model for predicting treatment prognosis of acute ischemic stroke.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early alterations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) may play a critical role in the progression of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This study aimed to develop a CSF-based clinical-radiomics model for predicting the functional outcomes in AIS patients following intravenous thrombolysis (IVT). Methods: This study included 308 AIS patients within 6 h of onset, divided into a training set (n=246) and a hold-out test set (n=62). Functional outcome was assessed at discharge using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), dichotomized into good (mRS ≤2) and poor (mRS >2) outcomes. CSF regions were automatically segmented on non-contrast computed tomography images, and radiomics features were extracted. After feature selection was sequentially performed using minimum redundancy maximum relevance algorithm followed by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, the radiomics signature model was constructed. Clinical features were selected through univariate and multivariate logistic regressions and subsequently integrated with radiomics features to develop combined models. Three machine learning classifiers, including Nu Support Vector Classification (NuSVC), logistic regression, and random forest, were trained and tested for prognostic prediction. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curves, with internal validation via five-fold cross-validation. Results: Among the 308 patients included, 155 patients had a good outcome and 153 had a poor outcome. A total of 1,874 radiomics features were extracted, among which 21 were selected for the radiomics model. Three clinical features were also identified for the clinical model. The combined clinical-radiomics model significantly outperformed single-modality models across all classifiers. The NuSVC-based combined model achieved the best performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.870 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.850-0.889] in cross-validation and 0.893 (95% CI: 0.817-0.968) in the test cohort. DCA further confirmed the superior clinical utility of the combined model. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the value of CSF radiomics signatures in predicting functional outcomes in AIS patients after IVT. The CSF-based combined model exhibited strong prognostic performance and clinical utility, highlighting its potential for supporting treatment decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.